Because I mean it shows he reviews and writes the most.
So in all actual fact shouldn't he be at the top.
I mean he reviews the most and also gives the most information for those that review the most.
So really he should go at the top since he is the most USEFUL.
Or maybe it's just me. It makes sense to me anyways.

Yea, maybe add some weight for the amount of reviews given into the scoring system. Say, add +5 or +10 to the score for each review that they've given.
Of course then again I guess the purpose of the list is to see who writes the most per review, on average.

Heh, I think we went through this before, where we called it 'most hardworking reviewer' where the score = Usefullness * # of reviews.

Of course everyone could manually derive this score by multiplying everyone usefulness and # of reviews, but that's also what automatic calculating tables do quite nicely as well, if that's a possibility.

Ya but I find when you have a high number of opinions you have to do like the average amount of words for it to even stay in the same score.
While if you go from 10000 words in an opinion and then do 20000 your score will be raised but not by much if you have like 47 opinions under you.
It's weird.